I would only start a vote if somebody objects.

How about adding this rule to our website, to make it even more official. I
would like to establish a document that contains all the rules we agreed on.
Similarly to the coding guidelines (
http://flink.apache.org/coding_guidelines.html) we could establish
Community guidelines?

On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org> wrote:

> Should we put that to an official vote, or wait for people to comment and
> (if nobody objects) consider it as agreed on through lazy consensus?
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Márton Balassi <balassi.mar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for the guide, thanks for clarifying the issue
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 2:30 PM, Till Rohrmann <trohrm...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes, we should have a guide like that somewhere.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We have not exactly defined this so far, but it is a good point to
> do
> > > so.
> > > > >
> > > > > I personally find it good to have changes associated with an issue,
> > > > because
> > > > > it allows you to trace back why the change was done.
> > > > > To make sure we do not overdo this and impose totally unnecessary
> > > > overhead,
> > > > > I would suggest the following:
> > > > >
> > > > > *No issue is required for*
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Small fixes like typos, simple warnings, adding/improving a
> > comment
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Adding and improving existing pages of the documentation
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Simple improvements of style / elegance / efficiency (simple
> > > > rewriting
> > > > > a loop / condition / method interaction) if no behavior is changed
> > > > >
> > > > > ==> Basically anything that does not change or add functionality
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *An issue is required for*
> > > > >
> > > > > Everything else, in particular:
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Anything that changes functionality or behavior relevant to
> users
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Anything that changes functionality or behavior relevant to
> other
> > > > > components
> > > > >
> > > > >   - Anything that adds a feature
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I would vote to allow coarse issues and have multiple commits that
> > > > > reference it
> > > > >
> > > > > [FLINK-1234] [runtime] Runtime support some cool new thing
> > > > > [FLINK-1234] [java api] Add hook for cool thing to java api
> > > > > [FLINK-1234] [scala api] Add hook for that thing to scala api
> > > > > [FLINK-1234] [optimizer] Make optimizer aware that it can exploit
> > this
> > > > > thing
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > The guide lines for pull-requests for committers are as follows:
> > > > >
> > > > > *A pull request with comments/additional signoff is required for
> > > anything
> > > > > that*
> > > > >
> > > > >   - breaks the public APIs
> > > > >
> > > > >   - adds methods to the public APIs (that will need to be kept
> stable
> > > > from
> > > > > them on)
> > > > >
> > > > >   - alters user-facing behavior (e.g., mutability of types, null
> > value
> > > > > handling, window semantics, ...)
> > > > >
> > > > >   - adds user-facing knobs (switches, config parameters, execution
> > > option
> > > > > on the execution environment)
> > > > >
> > > > >   - adds additional maven dependencies
> > > > >
> > > > >   - changes the way components interact
> > > > >
> > > > >   - touches highly sensitive and performance critical parts, such
> > > memory
> > > > > management or network stack
> > > > >
> > > > > ==> Changes that come with a pull request should have one or more
> > > issues
> > > > > associated with them.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone that wants to have comments or some additional pairs of eyes
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > code should make a pull request as well.
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > *Naming scheme for commits*
> > > > >
> > > > > [issue] [component] Message
> > > > >
> > > > > For fixes without an issue, the issue can be dropped.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think? Should we put this into the Wiki?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Greetings,
> > > > > Stephan
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 11:48 AM, Aljoscha Krettek <
> > aljos...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > I feel we never really talked about this. So, should we open Jira
> > > > issues
> > > > > > even for very small fixes and then add the ticket number to the
> > > commit?
> > > > > Or
> > > > > > should we just commit those small fixes. Right now, I have two
> > small
> > > > > fixes
> > > > > > (one is 4 lines, the other one is two lines) for the
> ValueTypeInfo
> > > and
> > > > > > TextValueInputFormat. Very obscure stuff, I know. :D
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Aljoscha
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to